Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Well, my visitors for the week?

leave a comment »

(Too bad I didn’t think of this during week of “Responsible Citizenhood, Par I of II”)!
Not sure if this will update itself….

Visit http://www.ipligence.com

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

June 16, 2009 at 11:45 am

Spiritual Machines and Cyberspeak People?

leave a comment »

Life, Liberty and the Pursuyt of Purpose?

Conjugate, Propagate and Delegate it to a Governmental Policy?


There are times, really, when I have wondered whether the domestic violence, school violence, etc., was merely a matter of saying “I am!” loudly enough to be heard.  Sometimes.   To me, meaning centered around purpose, conscious choice in the face of difficult circumstances, enabling creativity in children (often through singing).  As a mother, my purpose was never surrogate mother for the “state” (or anyone else), nor did parenting mean, choosing which daycare.  It meant the whole ball of wax.  

Today and this week were significant for two major religions.  I am uninvolved, this time round.  I have no significant sentiments,  The major drive of my life has not changed from yesterday to today:  (a) fiscal physical and emotional survival (b) finding and speaking some truth, (c) what can I do about the crises in the courts?  Can something I do or say avert the next family annihilation, or expose why these are happening to the point they do, less?



Last night I watched Dr. Who (yes, I have devolved, although in my defense, a typical day is long.  Also watching TV does help me forget that my children no longer live here, courtesy failure-to-enforce (across a spectra of institutions one would think WOULD) custody orders, such as sole physical custody to a nonbattering mother, etc.,   I watch TV at night, after reading, researching, writing, and connecting with people all day.  It is my non-think time.  This is also the first period in my adult life I watched TV regularly.  Given the last several years, I just don’t do chit-chat and entertainment well, and I have retreated from the former open home policies, integrating colleagues, my kids, their kids, and at-home clients (teaching).  I’m too often in shock, pissed off, or simply puzzling out how to solve the latest intractable legal issue (without funding).  

This could be mildly justified as social commentary on what is current diet and what age level the average evening program seems aimed at (what “market niche”).  Anyhow, so after konking out, I woke up to “Dr. Who.”  

In this episode, homeless and hungry people were being experimented upon by some mastermind trying to produce eternal life for his debilitated self.  Eventually upgraded (with screaming and frightening looking tools) to the metal-skinned Cybermen (clunking slowly, but ominious, destructive, and unstoppable through windows and other obstacles.  Briefly, I thought of the Book of Revelation in the Bible, where did the image come from?).  However, the populace were definitely “plugged in” and paused for their daily downloads.  Brain takeover was a few steps away.

Most fiction draws off real life, and comments on it.

So, the big fear is of robots taking over, and them physically destroying too many of us, of an outrageous conformity and willingness to take orders, no matter how horrible.

Let’s see, can this be identified by a metal skin and slow movements?

I think sometimes we are fearing the wrong things.  

From my perspective (a decade of “head of the household” DV plus about a decade of double-talk and psychospeak in what I thought was a justice system),  the degradation and fragmentation of languages into technospeak means human kind is perhaps getting so specialized that when their anointed (pardon, me, “apPOINTed”) experts do not speak, the rest of us are speechless, on issues which haven’t been proclaimed upon.  If it hadn’t been proclaimed or pronounced upon, then it must not exist, probably.  

Language is a two-edged sword.  We teach kids to define words properly in school, or get the multiple choice question wrong, and grade them on correctly guessing what the test-maker-meant.  The best use of language is with double-meanings and context sensitive.  I think school desensitizes the observing factors, at least when it comes to coursework.  

Particularly in the middle class, I think, who are not independently wealthy (do not have wealth-producing assets such that they could take time out to process things, or step away from their routine of JOB – WEEKEND – VACATION – LEISURE – KIDS EDUCATION lifestyle long enough to actually understand “what happened”?   If you want a very coherent opinion, dogmatic and determined, perhaps the two places to find it are among homeless people (who I’ve found to be VERY well-read, many of them) and — if you can find them — people who started a foundation or five.  You may not be rubbing shoulders with these people, but you can read the “History” section of their foundations.

And/Or, you can go to major universities around the country, and find out what centers, fellowships, and institutes have been named after them.  I have been.  It’s INTERESTING.

Well, enough commentary.  I just thought the following passage was interesting enough to post.  Decide for yourself if it’s relevant!

Species that overspecialized didn’t survive the crises as well as the generalists.  The ability to use TOOLS is key, as well as to adapt to different environments.

I am concerned that a tool the majority of us don’t have time to guard — carefully — is LANGUAGE.  (I say this despite the abominable prose above, let alone copyediting).  What I mean is that we have not experienced enough to connect terms in common use with commonly lived through experiences.  This does not reduce the affirmation and certainty with which they are used.  Hence, we still think that in the U.S. there are possibly three separate branches of government whose powers balance each other.  Or that Public Eduction is either.  Or that HomeSchooling (a new verb) is that, either.  My favorite oxymoron is when we get to the point that the ‘experts” on many topics who are listened to by virtue of Ph.D’s and publishings, have not actually experienced what they proclaim on.

One of my very favorite books in the world on these matters of perception/interpretation versus actually noticing and observing, was written by a woman who is (was?) an autistic behavioral scientist.  “ANIMALS IN TRANSLATION.”  I learned much about PTSD and WHY my thinking process changed after, oh, say, about 12 years of up-close dealing with people who lie, and one or more who stalk.  I became more alert to nonverbal cues (AND verbal ones).  This actually helped in a certain line of work (in the arts).  It did not help with relationships, overall, because the level of sensitivity was too high, and level of trust too low.  I hope to get it in balance one of these (years).  There was, however, a need to counter being too trusting.  

If this post was interesting, please comment.  Thank you.  It’s an FYI, and not one of my most passionate ones.


“LetsGetHonest” 04-11-09


I believe this is a review of the book on “Spiritual Machines.” 

If the machines are permitted to make all their own decisions, we can’t make any conjectures as to the results, because it is impossible to guess how such machines might behave. We only point out that the fate of the human race would be at the mercy of the machines. It might be argued that the human race would never be foolish enough to hand over all the power to the machines. But we are suggesting neither that the human race would voluntarily turn power over to the machines nor that the machines would willfully seize power. What we do suggest is that the human race might easily permit itself to drift into a position of such dependence on the machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of the machines’ decisions. As society and the problems that face it become more and more complex and machines become more and more intelligent, people will let machines make more of their decisions for them, simply because machine-made decisions will bring better results than man-made ones. Eventually a stage may be reached at which the decisions necessary to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage the machines will be in effective control. People won’t be able to just turn the machines off, because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would amount to suicide.

On the other hand it is possible that human control over the machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own, such as his car or his personal computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elite – just as it is today, but with two differences. Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consists of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see to it that everyone’s physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes “treatment” to cure his “problem.” Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or make them “sublimate” their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they will most certainly not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals.
1 The passage Kurzweil quotes is from Kaczynski’s Unabomber Manifesto, which was published jointly, under duress, byThe New York Times and The Washington Post to attempt to bring his campaign of terror to an end. I agree with David Gelernter, who said about their decision:
“It was a tough call for the newspapers. To say yes would be giving in to terrorism, and for all they knew he was lying anyway. On the other hand, to say yes might stop the killing. There was also a chance that someone would read the tract and get a hunch about the author; and that is exactly what happened. The suspect’s brother read it, and it rang a bell.
“I would have told them not to publish. I’m glad they didn’t ask me. I guess.”
(Drawing Life: Surviving the Unabomber. Free Press, 1997: 120.)



In an earlier post I looked at an article on “Intimate Partner Violence,” by a woman in Australia who helps women in crisis because of this. After grilling her article (I hope, not unkindly) on its premises — (which is how I converse, and think — interactively) I felt it only fair to search for the upcoming book “The Future By Us.” What I attempted to confront was the articles innocent, I felt, groupthink — vision of a violence-free word to be created by productive dialogue with others.

The google search led to a book I have (The Age of Spiritual Machines), reminding me uncomfortably of how little most of us understand what goverment-funded and privately-funded policies, established without input, alerts, discussion, or permission can do.  They are simply so large, well-funded, and in perpetual motion, that a person with whom an individual actually interfaces may or may not be able (or prone) to act AS a person, but rather as an extension of a policy only.  

As a mother (or father, I guess), you may be talking to a live person that looks to be living, breathing, and sentient — but that person is working in a system that has policies, priorities — and owes their funding to those policies and priorities — that may have nothing to do with you, your interests, your children, or anything you call moral, upright, or such.

At some point, one realizes that most of the myths we were raised with (the justice system is about justice, law enforcement is about law enforcement, and courts are where both sides of a case are heard and fairly adjudicated, in the pure form. Those laws you finally looked up that are to protect your children are on the books to be enforced, and “if only” the judge knew that these laws applied, he/she/it would rule correctly.

Wrong again. I learned a lot of this through NAFCJ.net AND checking out the links, I spent weeks on Google and now habitually (it is my HABIT) when reading almost anything in this field, published by an organization, I look at: 1. Board of Directors 2. Funding, and then I go back and see who they are. SOME insight develops over time.

I’m almost afraid to review what I wrote above.  This blog is not about essays, it’s about the act of speaking, and I hope that Gentle Readers will forgive shortcomings in this one in particular.  I just thought it interesting.  Unlike other topics here, it lacks the intensity that makes for focused writing.

Ah well….  



Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

April 11, 2009 at 3:26 pm

Wait a minute! “IPV,” “DV”– Social Scourges or Euphemism and Oxymoron?

leave a comment »

Vocabulary Analogies.

I was tempted to call this “in which I discuss the dissemination of obfuscation,” but it’s not really a laughing matter when people are dying over this, weekly, and around the globe.

I am not of the belief that utopia is possible, at least as enforced by any state agency, government, religion, NGO, or anyone else.  When I hear someone wanting to “help” me, at least someone I don’t know and didn’t personally solicit to do so, I try to head for the hills, and highly recommend this.

Unfortunately, with the advent of the Internet, the Language Police lurking around every corner, and our children being CAUGHT, practically, as they exit the womb by someone funded by someone fanatically suspicious of the mother/child relationship (i refer NOT to the practitioners — thank you, mine were born in a hospital — but to the premises behind some of the policies) — there are fewer and fewer hills left.

This includes hills and pockets of time as well, and that is almost nowhere as true as when a woman, with children, tries to exit a man, who has threatened and hit her, with institutional intervention.  

Just as, thanks to the increasing attempts to criminalize “homeschooling” (another misnomer) in my home state, there is less and less time available to the average citizen — whether parent, teacher, commuter employee, or child, unless it is built into one’s profession.    I have some perspective (age, profession, and parenting) from which to say this, but have not as yet decided to share identifying go public in more blatant identifying detail  (see topic, leaving domestic violence…)

So in general, people do lack either time, or motivation, to address IPV and DV unless we are typically involved by personal association.  It is, after all, less pleasant than stopping to smell the roses; in fact it’s profoundly disturbing.  

But I say, how about time to stop and smell the vocabulary?  Those most inclined to do this are those who have tasted its fruit, where that fruit is sometimes stale and putrid.  Maybe you could from the safety of your home (I’m not asking for money, or for you to call your legislator, am I?) might stop a moment to consider.

Some of these terms have become SO proprietary they are almost meaningless, although I am VERY grateful for the women and men before me who passed laws to criminalize “IPV” and “DV” and I am VERY very grateful that I had at least one opportunity to evict someone who had battered me in the classic definition of the word and was engaging in a pattern of what is called “domestic violence.”

IPV for the uninitiated is a version of “Intimate Partner Violence,” itself probably a linguistic migration from “DV” (Domestic Violence).  Trust me, there is nothing domesticated about violence, it is per se a refusal to be domesticated.  Nor does it only occur domestically (in the home).  It’s a lucky person that can domesticate a few cats, but who can “domesticate” a person that has taken to hands (or other handy implements) to intentionally: tame the shrew, or beat/threaten/punish the woman (oops, “partner”) in the process of teaching gender differences DO rule, and some divides were ordained by God (yeah, right) and not cross-able.  Note in that concept the transference of protesting hitting one’s (in this example) opposite-sex partner (with whom one has engaged in sex) to illustrate the girls do NOT rule, Boys do.  [This is a particularly religious thing, though not limited to it].

Intimate PARTNER?  Now that I think of it, when the relationship is He hits Her (or He hits Him, She hits Her, or She hits Him for the politically more correct than I am feeling today), it is the precise opposite of what the word “partner” means.  I mean, there’s a “partners in crime,” a humorous phrase used sometimes of a rapscallionly escapade that’s not really a crime.   I was mugged twice myself –outside the home.  I didn’t go back and “partner” with the guy who made off with my purse.  

Why then would I attempt to with the guy who made off with my children?  Can we not depart in peace, or get some assistance in this process, eh?

More to the point, why would some agencies in Washington, D.C. and (yes, I looked) Colorado, as tested in a variety of states, usually including California, determine that my doing so would be good for the overall populace?  It really goes against nature and common sense.  WHO was it that didn’t respect boundaries to start with, generating what’s called some form of separation?

Therefore I say, Intimate Partner Violence has GOT to be some kind of triple oxymoron non-think that has just wormed its way into our vocabulary, nonprofit [and governmental] organizations to distinguish it from stranger violence.  

Well, folks, IPV is far WORSE than stranger violence.  Stranger violence, if you AND yours survive it, and are not maimed, is not statistically likely to reoccur and escalate to death.   Stranger violence has the concept of accidence in it, you could MAYBE have avoided it, or it was unavoidably bad luck.  Not so with “IPV,” which when magnified through the institutions designed to (but in general failing to) put a stop to it, is closer to a total blood transfusion, and entails a personal, specific, and persistent hostility and will to hurt from a specific individual specifically against another.  

Anyway, words don’t just drop down from the sky.  Many of the times (at least in the U.S.) they are federally mandated.  Like “Access Visitation” — but that’s another topic for another time.    

Once these words have been mandated, and promoted, from “on high” (that’s called, government of the people, by the people, and for the people — or it seems I once heard it was….) they are then circulating through the lower, plebian realms — courts, schools, police stations, nonprofit agencies, and so forth.  And the attendant associations to these agencies and institutions, FEW of which YOU are going to be involved with unless you (a) work there, or (b) deal with someone who does, or (c) whose life has led through their doors, or (d) someone dependent on you, or vice versa, as a friend or relative, has also.  

My sarcasm here is not really out of place.  I have been tracing funding of dysfunctional organizations, with some guidance (NAFCJ.net being among but not the only source) of WHY when I knock on a door and sit down in an office, the agency-speak is simply in my native tongue, but with an entirely different set of rules.  The general rule I apply anymore is that whatever it says on the door, the OPPOSITE is not just the effect, but the intended effect and implicit in the design.  

Gentle readers should also understand re: blogger/survivors — there were years of being told NOT to talk (and still are) under our belt.  So, part of blogging is just telling it.  One woman’s simple attempt to summarize the problem (see “Australians Talk,” previous blog and links) spoke to me, so I slapped it up here, thinking it would suffice for a post.  

No, darn it, I had to actually think about it.  I thought about how insane/inane it is to sterilize these words, as we do, face it.  If even God had to do quite a bit of show and tell (miracles, sending a Son, etc.) (was that a Freudian or Theological slip — mine is showing, I suppose), similarly, those who have actually survived this violence, trauma, and losing someone or something to it, should be setting policy AND vocabulary.  

That’s enough for now.

Intimate, Partner, Violence.

Domestic, Violence.

No wonder we need mental health professionals throughout the fields attendant on these terms.

Can you wrap your mind around that one?  (No wonder it’s a market niche around “family courts” etc…..)

the word “court” certainly applies, in the sense, court someone’s favor, or in the royalty application.  The word family, again, has just about become meaningless when those promoting it as essential to the fabric of our nation (and to a degree, I Do agree, believe it or not). 

I know women who went homeless fleeing abuse.  They had homes and professions after the exit; the stability appeared to threaten the status quo, the basket was turned over and emptied out, and through the same mechanism that has put my stomach hungry some days, blogging where the internet is free, and unable to purchase a simple meal at the same time.

Alternately, these terms rolls off your thinking like water off a duck’s back, how many intimate, wonderful, partnering, dynamic, sensitive moments in life have along with the oil coating also rolled past your door? Some of the best parts of life (not just your body) are sensitive to others around you, and what national policies mean to immediate neighbors.

Let’s properly sort those terms:

“Intimate Partner Violence” and “Domestic Violence.”

Move the words around, and it makes much more sense:

Put “intimate partner” with “domestic” and you have something user-friendly.

Take the two “Violences” and keep them separate, and the antagonism is right there out in the open:

V2 (Violence X Violence).  There’s no place for this in the home.

Again, just as a reminder, the definitions include a pattern of oppression.  No, I don’t mean, being asked to wash the floors if you’re awoman.  I mean being TOLD to wash the floors NOW, or else, and the “else” you already  know, because it happened before, and hurt.  Or destroyed.  Or violated one of the rights listed in the Bill of Rights.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

March 25, 2009 at 5:15 am

When she “Shows and Tells” — take it seriously. It takes courage.

leave a comment »

We tell young people to speak up about abuse.
This one did.”

Our global village — it seems to me that approximately one a week, at least nationwide, is occurring.  The police WILL respond, and will sometimes prevent or minimize the fall-out, but more likely (they are only human, they are not omnipresent) they will count and identify the bodies, and speak to reporters, and neighbors.  This is too late for those speaking up.    This can be true when it comes to domestic violence also.

Before you read this post — if you read fast, if you skim well, and if you could commit to read THREE (3) pages of single-spaced, narrative, print, you will understand more: Do NOT pass go.  Click on the centered title “Brave Children Speak Up” Read the first page “intro”, to the bottom, hit “next” or “continued,” then the next page to the bottom, click on “next” and then the 3rd page, to the bottom (individual stories).

Brave Children Speak Up

Alanna’s story is well-known — she finally fled from Northern California to Southern (Los Angeles) and was able to get help.

How I Process (present tense) My Experience (past)

I did not experience abuse as a child. Mine didn’t start til I was almost 40 years old. Yet I will affirm — you are not the same afterwards — your understanding of the world is not the same either, and never will be. You can function, but you sprout antenna, learn to “deal,” test your systems of meaning (all, for the most part, remain suspect), and are much, much, MUCH more alert to the various signals and possible interpretations of almost every one. This is rough on people you wish to maintain friendships, let alone a romantic connection, with. I know that I “tested.’ When my friend passed the test, didn’t blow up, didn’t run away, it frightened me more. I lost so many job situations that (for a period), I began to self-sabotage work rather than experience the forced-out situation again. (Economic control is a primary means of control). I felt like I was another species for a while, and finally accepted that, in some respects, I was. And I was NOT sexually abused as a child. . . . Or beaten. . . . Or deprived.

Negotiating what for others is often an Average situation:

[Leaving home.  Coming back home.   Possibly reporting what happened at home — to be continued. . . ]


One dilemma still up for grabs is a difficult one. I have faith, but I do not trust churches. This affects support systems and for sure sociability. But, I will affirm — there ARE people (both genders) who target these areas, and this IS one area a vulnerable (to being dominated to excess) women can be found. They also take in divorced and needy women, at times, hence, a charming unscrupulous man will find ample fields there.

One has to constantly renegotiate meaning in life. I have come to believe this is an asset. Intuition comes in handy in many fields (particularly artistic ones or ones that deal with group dynamics).

When abuse happens mid-way, or later in life, it is difficult to know what goals to set, in exiting it. It is also VERY difficult to exit it, as by middle age, so many professions, communities, and connections have come. More schooling is not always the answer. What about relationships?

I cannot imagine being a child who has betrayed by an adult.
Mine were (I will testify and do). But I cannot imagine it still, how to callous onesself and just go deal with it.

Brave Children Speak Up

I cannot think too hard on this one today.  I refuse to abuse substances to turn my mind away.  Each day’s internal parasympathetic (?) wiring stands alone, how much it can handle, but because I know what it’s like to have people “unable to stomach” my truths, I try to process and stomach others’ I read about.  Can you handle this one?  Perhaps you can.  Children in the situation HAVE to.  

I would like to say: It’s  not the gun, but the attitude in the person carrying the gun.  If it was not a gun, it could be a knife, an ax, or as happened recently a sword.  

It’s also another, more communal problem called “denial.”  

February 25, 2009

Police respond to “shots fired” and find family dead in murder-suicide

Editor’s note: This tragic incident is one of several like it that have surfaced recently. Although the exact details are not yet known, the mass violence it reflects needs to be noted.  

. . .  “It’s important to remember that one of the most dangerous persons an officer can face is someone who feels they’ve got nothing to live for and nothing to lose. There are a growing number of those people and that’s a very real threat to officer safety and survival. Now, more than ever, officers need to be highly trained, highly focused and thoroughly prepared to deal with the threats and challenges of doing their jobs in a time of crisis.”

Stay alert, be trained—even if it means taking steps to seek your own training—and remember that even “regular people” who would otherwise seem harmless and unlikely to pose a deadly threat, like the man in this incident, may in fact be extremely dangerous.

— Scott Buhrmaster, PoliceOne Managing Editor


RE:  “ someone who feels they’ve got nothing to live for “

My recommended reading:  Viktor Frankl, “Man’s Search for Meaning.”

There are choices, even in a concentration camp.

Another link that is not always explored, but should be, is the pharmaceutical connection.  I speak as someone whose father in law was on medication (and committed suicide).   Not smart to tinker too much with this chemistry.  My policy is, don’t!  Your body was designed smart:  handle with care.  

By Matt Sedensky 
Associated Press 

MIAMI — A 53-year-old man fatally shot his wife and two daughters Wednesday before turning the gun on himself, and a 16-year-old son who survived the attack managed to call 911 as he escaped uninjured from the Miami home, authorities said. . . .

Sarit Betancourt, a 44-year-old school bus driver who lives near the family, said the father is a Cuban immigrant who gave piano lessons at a guitar shop and at his home. Betancourt’s two sons, ages 9 and 10, had been taking piano lessons from him once a week since 2006.

“He was a marvelous person and a tremendous professor,” she said. “People would enter the house, and you just breathed peace.”

[WELL, not for a little girl….]



14 year old Priscilla Amador did not want to have sex or interact sexually with a man 40 years her senior.
Especially her father. About 8 years of this was too much. Finally she worked up courage to tell:
The Miami Herald, 2-27-09
It cost her -- and her sister -- and her mother - their lives. I speculate that HE could not stand the shame
or public exposure -- that task had been assigned (by him) for HER to carry. I'll say, assuming the
charges were valid. One way to cut short THAT conversation, well, see headlines.
"Be Prepared!" How? I don't know, but I know I must find out. So should you.
I cannot editorialize much today. I am processing this one... I have teens.
I also know that the issue is NOT primarily sex. It's about character, values,
and entitlements. I do not think we should be suspecting all our neighbors of this
(though clearly it's underreported). Perhaps we should all make sure that our kids
have at least ONE other NON-family member they can confide in, and who know them.
And we should all be informed of the overlap between wife abuse and child abuse.
And that our young women are to value, and be able to hold, boundaries. Unfortunately,
these boundaries are daily violated in so many contexts (including schools), that I'm at
some loss to, as I posted elsewhere, safety a "place." I think that self-sufficiency has
to be a THING you carry with you.  
As I said, today, there are limits to what can be processed. But I will not drop the topic.
Are you, reader, aware that in Family Courts across the nation, custody of children, when
contested, it being given to batterers in retaliation for reporting abuse of one form or another.
If you don't believe me, believe the children who reported, and lived to tell:

Jennifer Collins’ Family Fled the U.S. for Safey! From Court-Ordered Child Abuse. She aged out and spoke up. And others.

Related Articles:

 Six die in L.A. family murder-suicide 

 Police: L.A. man kills wife, 5 children, himself over job troubles

 Officials: Financial crisis can lead to violence 

 Police survey links crime spike to economy

 As economy dives, crime fears spike


WHY Family Court (let’s get honest) “matters” to us all…

leave a comment »

…Even if you’re not inside the doors. . .

…Even if you have your “act” together — 

…Even if you’re not IN any marital or intimate partner act.  Or relationship.


You are probably living with, next to, or in association with someone who has been.  At least one of the people who go behind those doors into this family law / let’s mediate / co-parent / share custody / just get along (adversarial) system is going to be traumatized.  

 Another will be probably robbed.  A third will be shocked.  A fourth will be rewarded.  A fifth will be back for more easy victories by hearsay accusations the next time he (or she) has a grudge.  A sixth will be forced back to negotiate with the abusive partner she (OK, now you can argue:  \”or he\”)  was attempting to separate from   — and will be lectured, after having worked up courage to do this — not to upset the children by showing anger, or conflict, because in this YOU-topia supposedly conflict never happens — or at LEAST never between parents.  

This belief, along with Santa Claus, according to the same logic, is going to set your children on a good path for life.

A seventh will have been raised by one or more of the above.  An eighth will be teaching (or in class next to) one of the above. 

For a take on the intergenerational, societal transmission of trauma, see “www.sanctuaryweb.com


Get real   – – – and


Let’s Get Honest.  Without hate.

Let’s look at the script (and playwrights) in family law.

Let’s look at the off-stage directions and who takes cues from whom.  And let’s begin to understand that this is not a game, it is real people, real lives, and in some cases, physically “lost” in the drama.  

Let’s ALL consider the profit/loss ratio in this endeavor, family law, family court services, custodyh evaluations, mediations, court-appointed guardians, and attempting to, through this process and under cover of “law”, force divorcing parties with enough anmosity they couldn’t work it out separately to come seeking a higher authority to punish the ex somehow, or extract children, or money from her or him, and on what basis.  Personally, I (sarcastically) feel that both these words:


are accurate.  The trick, like in any new culture, is to understand the idioms — usage — nuances.  The “nuance” in this case is, assume the exact opposite is meant.  Supposedly this is about “family,” and to help them.  Supposedly courts, in the USA (and elsewhere) exist for the purpose of determining truth and dispensing justice.  The words “public servant” possibly come to mind.

COURT:  Go back a few hundred years, and think “court” again.  Try Henry VIII or Louis XIV.  Think about what takes place in the halls of a palace, and who gets to be there?  How did one get an appointment at a palace?  How did one, having obtained it, REtain it? There, that’s a little better, you’re getting warm…  . . . Also, did you know that any attorney is considered an “officer of the court.” (not of you…) (I THINK).

FAMILY:  The “Family” in question is less likely your own (which will be devastated, most likely, one way or another), but the true “FAMILY” here in are the professionals, and so-called experts that know they will be dealing with each other on an ongoing basis, referring business, exchanging pleasantries, and in some cases referring cases (translation:  Jobs).   “Good” for them actually could mean keeping a family IN the system.  “Good” for the family biological generally means getting themselves OUT of the system and back to life as almost paranormal — or at least work, and sleep.  Perhaps the words “fealty” or “feudal” are closer to the truth.  I do not denigrate ethical, honest, overworked, and noble judges attorneys, or (well, I haven’t met such a mediator).  I’m sure they exist, and among the approximately seven judges I’ve stood before in this case, some more than once, only the 3rd one would I characterize as ethical and having a reputation of actually having read the paperwork before him prior to ruling on it.  Unfortunately, he quit family law, but I have been to date unable to.

The “COURT” does indeed hail back to royalty, and I think that is the most idealized among us that are going to lose in court.  We have believed (prior to baptism by fire) that this system, while we weren’t in it, somehow existed, in ether, and would protect the innocent and help the falsely accused, if only the truth were at.

I tried that for many years with a man that, in about the 8th year of this “just trying to get along” (survive, from my standpoint), was offended, again, by a minor perceived provocation.  I turned the music down, which was earsplitting and had just been turned up to make a point that the conversation was over.  We had small children at this time.  I reached over and turned a radio dial.  Next thing you know, I had been grabbed, hurled, and landed on my chin in literally another room.  Teeth were knocked loose.

I didn’t learn til many, MANY years later, that this was felony level domestic violence (serious injury caused) or that even a difference existed between the civil and criminal system existed.  Why would I?  I had prior to then inhabited churches, schools, parks (raising kids) with playgroups, and concert halls.  I did not think that a DETAILED awareness of how our criminal, civil, and other justice system works, let alone knowing the laws of my state (and federal) were important to my safety and wellbeing.  NOW, I think that at least the ability to navigate them, including what is the flowchart of a basic lawsuit (which is not that complicated…), should be required for high school graduation.  Unfortunately, it appears that in too many US schools, we are still working on the ability to read.  Period.

In other places, this may be called “DOMESTIC RELATIONS” or something similar.  The same interpretions apply.  Get your head out of the clouds and understand who is cozy with whom, and that it’s relationships, not evidence (in practice) that counts, in most arenas.  THAT is the problem, and like the beginning of our country, principles count and are worth fighting to preserve, or restore.  However one may bash “Dead White Males who owned slaves, or that it took women even longer to get the vote, the fact remains that  that Constitution exists, as do the Bill of Rights.  Like laws, muscles, or any other talent, they mean nothing without application towards the goal, and where these count is, they are that ideal.   Or, should I yet say “were”? – –  Use it or lose it. . . .. 



Let’s consider

what kind of emotion drives people even showing up, via an Order to Show Cause requesting a Motion to MAKE THAT WOMAN  (or MAN) stop, pay, or give me (back) my children.  Think about it, and about the logic of any authority (which these courts are, in fact that is primarily what they are, order-makers)  then telling both parties — when only one initiated the motion —  (this is now the script) that “conflict” is bad for kids, so pretend you don’t have any, or no more contact with your kids.  And let’s compare that with things such as, the state laws, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, and so forth.. . . . MANY of these families, with kids, ended up there precisely because of out of court conflicts that had almost gotten lethal, or had hurt someone.  The basic premise of any legal motion is that some “wrong” happened ( “tort” = “wrong” — and believe me, I didn’t learn that term even 3 years into the system), and therefore the court should redress it.  However, in entering the halls, when kids are involved, thinking goes haywire, and despite the system of “tort” “redress” (etc.) on which law is based, the judges, and associated employees of the court, or an affiliate of it, then all communicate clearly that BOTH parties are wrong, since they couldn’t settle their own differences without court help.  They are presumed needing a sound lecture of some sort, and of course therapy, if possible.  The general idea of the process is DUE process.  However, the general idea of the family law system as it now exists is virtual behavioral modification, and through this, I say, social engineering — mass scale.  JUST REMEMBER “COURTS” // “ROYALTY.”  Where do the allegiances typically lie? It often gets down to simply the character of the individual judges.  


The desired result of a hearing in court is called and “order.”  Contempt of it can (doesn’t often, but CAN) end one in jail.   In the mythic interpretation of the process, which those of us without prior connections probably held going in, the order comes from a judge who is more noble and neutral than either of you, will hear EVIDENCE impartially, and in a manner coherent with the rules of court for the jurisdictions, and judicial ethics, as listening to attorneys (if any) who also abide by their professional codes of ethics, etc.


Like I just said above, about Santa Claus — –


How does this relate to you, if you’re not a denizen (making a living at this) or someone who went IN, but hasn’t been able to get OUT of the system yet?

It being a stressed, fragmented world, in general, I imagine that you figure it’s “not your business.”

How about if I said, it’s your money, though, as a taxpayer? 

How about if I said, it MAY just relate to the statistical probability of someone you know being a bystander of an irate spouse that took the law into his (and yes, it primarily IS “his” so, or the major news media AND USDOJ are both run by radical feminists, and censor mothers wiping out fathers, kids, bystander and a cop or two, and themselves because they were publicly humiliated, or just bitter, and couldn’t help themselves — and knew how to use a gun, or a knife, or a club, or tie a knot, etc.).


I’m WAY newer to blogging than to Family Court.

On the other hand, unlike FC, my blog doesn\’t imply that it\’s saving families, or even serving them (as in \”Family Court Services.\”  Nor do I hope that somehow this will orchestrate a brave, new world.  In fact years ago, when I was hauled in (no, it wasn\’t voluntary), my venues were limited to, and my focus on:  my immediate family, profession(s), colleagues (when I still had them), and the communities I lived and worked in.  I got on-line to email some friends from time to time.  I wasn\’t fighting to find out where my rights went, and (because I wasn\’t in the habit of breaking laws or court orders to get my way in life) I wasn\’t desperately trying to search what my state code called that last despicable act.  Or how come it only took 20 minutes to change my kid\’s futures, that had been set since an early age towards college, with scholarships, ANY college they set their sites on, within reason.

I would like to talk about what some of these myths do, that allow decent upstanding law-abiding, non-wife-beating, hard-working parents (and individuals) to keep clear of these halls and not trouble their sleep about what happens inside them .  Let’s Get Honest about what the myth that justice is happening in behind these closed doors  is costing the country, and your communities, overall.  

Recently (Spring 2009), the US closed lots of schools in a panic over swine flu.  Clearly someone understands the concept of “quarantine” for the general public safety.  Then they decided to open them again.  How about opening some of the closed doors in courtrooms?  The people’s changes and humiliations / /wins / losses //responses to these (trauma, or as it sometimes, I”m sorry to say, turns out, kidnappings // femicides/homicide/suicides // poverty afterwards is already in public view.

So, “general public,” gentle readers, the family court leper colony is not working — for the family, or for the general public.  However, it IS working quite well, thank you, for the type of personnel who designed it to start with (primarily, in the USA, in Southern California).   And YOU (if you are Joe common bloke, Ann single working woman, or Mrs. Joe & Ann Smith, gainfully employed.    Or (I hear now Maine is the 5th state in the US), Mr. & Mr. Joe and Harry Blow and Ms. & Ms. Ann and Sydney BestFriends.  It may not really be about gender, only, in the courts either.  I was a Mr. & Mrs., and prior to separation, we paid too, unaware of others’ trauma.

Any effort to reform it, should this be the goal, will have to address for whom this venue IS working just fine.  To track this, try some of my links, or do your own research.  I wouldn’t suggest calling all men bad (OR good) or all women, and the culture in general, a bunch of femininazi, male-bashing, sex-deprived (or sex-crazed, as case may be) misfits.  That’s generally speaking not helpful.  

What may be more helpful is to realize that large sectors of populace do actually believe those things.  Some of them say it with Ph.D. language (“fatherlessness” — a.k.a. single mothers, case in point — are to blame for society’s ills.).  Can you recognize the same talk, said in “expert” language and footnoted with a bunch of experts who believe the same thing?  Then you’re getting a handle on the picture.

NOTE on TONE:  “Related Blogs,” to left, some of them have a different tone than I want here.  But they ALSO still have facts (news reports, laws, cases, etc.) there too.  And they have a right to respond as expressively as they want to.  Many or all of the bloggers there typically, lost custody of children to a batterer or a child-moleester, and sometimes as a direct consequence for having reported it.  Some of them, as I heard, have been in jail for failing to be able, after that, come up with enough child support (we’re talking women).  Some of the women I’ve met recently have gone to international courts for safety, and they/we are also aware of other groups going to the same international courts for different purposes.  

So they have a right to be pissed off and say “forget you” or “I’m pissed off” or THIS (see image) is what I think of that group of demagogues.   The point of my blog is dialogue (hopefully) and taking a close look at the players who are laughing the way to the bank (metaphorically) while the cats and dogs are spitting, hissing, biting, and scratching in the dust.  I hope to keep the intensity level just enough to keep you (meaning “us”) VERY uncomfortable with inaction, but not so lit up that only discharging emotion action takes place.

Speaking up IS action, and particularly if one has been subject to violence already for doing so.   

Identifiable causes, and identifiable solutions exist to the problems of familycourtmatters.  These solutions are emotionally painful and would require some businesses that profit from our pain to find another source of referral, or another line of  work.  I suggest they be required to work with tangible production, who have manipulated people as if they were putty to accept the dysfunction — but let’s hope do not require bloodshed.  And bloodshed IS already happening as a direct consequence of the hostility, lack of personal restraint, and level of frustration (BUT, it’s still the lack of restraint, I say) that is stirred up in these venues.  So, see some of the “related blogs” to left.   These women have been at it longer than me, and they have done their homework and I believe lived it too.  I’m talking being stripped down naked when they went in for help.  The problem is international in scope.   

I was a hardworking (female, single mother) bloke, too, until I attempted to renew a standing domestic violence restraining order, simply in order to participate better in the “hard-working parent” part.  I held no personal animosity against my children’s father, I just was unreconciled to the battering, abuse thing.  Other than that, he was allowed to see his children quite frequently, just not continue to assault me, in front of them.  I’m no criminal, and wasn’t a bitter, etc., etc. Mom.  However, I had recently and VERY belatedly gotten some legal help setting boundaries, obviously an issue where there has been violence, and there was a major amount of cleanup and rebuilding.  I needed my personal space for sure. This is a little hard to establish when one’s partner is more focused on his “manhood” than your “person-hood.”    

Now I have been in the courts, shortly here, ALMOST as many years as I was in in-home, upfront abuse.  I think this perspective should be discussed.  I also want to speak to some of the noble people who have kept their noses clean by leaving justice to the experts, and mythically believing that, even if it DOESN’T happen, it’s not going to affect them personally.  

It already has.

BUT — can we talk, blog, comment, post links, favorite books, and simply converse, without the  skip the hate talk, pompous vague assertions, and ex-spurt** opinions, but

just see if (or is it \”whether\”)? there are still a few good men, women,

 – – and children (children can blog, right?) —  

who can  skillfully toss out some metaphors, paradigms, puns, and maybe whimsical analogies

for me (and y\’all) to juggle around, look at them from underneath,

see if they have some weight, or bounce, or whether they dissipate into thin air under

their own hot, gaseous contents.  This might even be fun.


Venom is not welcome.  Biting sarcasm is fine.  Insults too (it’s hard to be sarcastic without insulting SOMEone), but no threats, no advocacy to violence OR any illegal activity (I LIKE my blog, thank you!).  Name-calling should be fleeting, at least skillful, and only, if a tall, as a lead in to something worthwhile to say.  Remember, I moderate the comments.

Get personal — and speak for yourself:  I FEEL, I\’VE NOTICED,  I BELIEVE, but not personally nasty.  Don\’t behind behind the curtain of plurals, vague assertions that can\’t be disproved, pronounced with a finality.  This is not the place for the Wizard of Oz, but a bunch of Totos.  We will bark back and expose your backside.  Take credit for having a genuine personal experience apart from the gang you happen to belong to.  I\’ll do the same.   

**Ex-spurts are known by that action — spurting forth publications, opinions, pronouncements (DVDs, Conferences, and more).  Did a conference save a life?  Maybe.  I’m generally a little wary when the people pronouncing on families can afford the DVDs and conferences, and the subject families, after having been “fixed” by the same bunch, can’t.  Where’s the due process in THAT?

Forming organizations, alliances, and nonprofits to stop what the other nonprofits are doing wrong, or compensate for whatever government isn\’t doing to their pleasing.  

The real experts have had the experiences BEFORE they start publishing, promoting, and starting branches of study that didn\’t exist before a pet pre-occupation became a profession.  I\’d rather SEE an expert (at his or her work) than HEAR one any day.

And I do music. . . . . or Did.  My music survived only XX years parallel to lawsuits, accusations, family rifts, threats, stalking etc.  I’m here still at XX + about 2 years post-music, and still sweeping up.  Like any Mom who has better things to do with (what remains of) her time, and always did, I am interested in stopping the mess-making at its source.  

I plan to do plenty of spurting forth of words here — but unlike those in family court (I mean, the denizens, not the nomads passing through),

I am not trying to use these words to separate you from your children — or your money.  Just maybe some of your time.   I have no style sheet.  Remember the advice of Tim Ferriss — you can get ex-spurt status on any number of things in under 4 weeks — it\’s more a matter of credibility.    On the other hand, you can say the same thing for a decade or two,

I have no outline.  I simply intend to talk, promote my links and books, and see what\’s around the bend here.  Don\’t be too rigid except where it counts — (no, fellas, not that part!) — on civil rights.  On matters of law, and fair play.  And on the facts.  There are plenty of ways to skin a cat, but whose idea was that to start with?  

There are also many ways to abuse – – very few, that I\’ve found, to stop it  — but \”family court\” sure doesn\’t appear to be ONE of them.

Possibly removing the financial / emotional incentives for continued abuse.  

What do you say?

Please make fun of some euphemisms.  Speak in short words.  Or long words.  Just don\’t bore us with something we\’ve already been drenched in – – like \”alienation,\” or insult my intelligence by pronouncing a truth that is your personal truth only as if it were one of those universal ones, like (at least to date), water is essential to life.  Having two parents in the home, I\’m sorry to say, is not, not always.  I know plenty of very, very dysfunctional two-parent homes.  I came from one, and so did my erst-while, ex-cohabitant spouse.  I\’ll verify he\’s got some severe issues, and I\’ve read in my pleadings, this is also held to be true of me.  So, one exception disproves a universal rule, let\’s get (real).

%d bloggers like this: